"Can we use a distributed database instead? If the answer is ‘Yes’, why go for blockchain at all? Indeed, blockchain is slower and more resource-intensive."
The key factor when assessing a blockchain project is indeed to see what is the advantage of a blockchain vs a usual database.
Most of the time, there is none. Worse, cost of a blockchain is more expensive as pointed by the article.
And you still need an authoritative registry somewhere if there any physical item involved.
In addition to that, blockchain projects faces another business issue: to be really decentralized, you have to lose control of what you put on the blockchain, which is hard to conceive for a private company.
From at I remember, at least in Europe, it's only from 1994-1995 that you could start thinking having a better proposition with a PC than with an Amiga/Atari ST.
In order to surpass what you had on an Amiga 500/600 in terms of games, your needed at least a small 386 VGA.
Before that, the only way to get a configuration at the same price was typically some Amstrad PC (typically the popular PC1512), far less capable in terms of graphics and music.
Glad to see those valuable principles written, even if it seems we are heading in the complete opposite. At least we can try to apply them on our side business.
These were also true in the early ages of aviation:
“Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.”
As a regular user of this wonderful archive.org project, I found it a pitty that no agreement could be found with editors such as Hachette regarding old books.
Without archive.org, it seems no money at all was made from them.
A subscription to access these old books would be a win-win, with a part redistributed to editors.
Access could be made from archive.org or why not, directed to a frame in editor websites.
Same for old magazines which are really appreciated by the retrocomputing community.
